Schild, Steven

Patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC) and favorable survival prognoses may benefit from radiation doses exceeding 10 × 3.0 Gy. In a multi-center phase 2 trial, patients receiving 15 × 2.633 Gy (41.6 Gy10) or 18 × 2.333 Gy (43.2 Gy10) were evaluated for local progression-free survival (LPFS), motor/sensory functions, ambulatory status, pain, distress, toxicity, and overall survival (OS). They were compared (propensity score-adjusted Cox regression) to a historical control group (n = 266) receiving 10 × 3.0 Gy (32.5 Gy10). In the phase 2 cohort, 50 (of 62 planned) patients were evaluated for LPFS. Twelve-month rates of LPFS and OS were 96.8% and 69.9%, respectively. Motor and sensory functions improved in 56% and 57.1% of patients, and 94.0% were ambulatory following radiotherapy. Pain and distress decreased in 84.4% and 78.0% of patients. Ten and two patients experienced grade 2 and 3 toxicities, respectively. Phase 2 patients showed significantly better LPFS than the control group (p = 0.039) and a trend for improved motor function (p = 0.057). Ambulatory and OS rates were not significantly different. Radiotherapy with 15 × 2.633 Gy or 18 × 2.333 Gy was well tolerated and appeared superior to 10 × 3.0 Gy.

Radiotherapy of lung cancer may cause pneumonitis that generally occurs weeks or months following therapy and can be missed. This prospective trial aimed to pave the way for a mobile application (app) allowing early diagnosis of pneumonitis. The primary goal was the identification of the optimal cut-off of a score to detect pneumonitis of grade ≥2 after radiotherapy for lung cancer. Based on the severity of symptoms (cough, dyspnea, fever), scoring points were 0–9. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC)-curves were used to describe the sensitivity and specificity. The area under the ROC-curve (AUC) was calculated to judge the accuracy of the score, Youden-index was employed to define the optimal cut-off. Until trial termination, 57 of 98 patients were included. Eight of 42 patients evaluable for the primary endpoint (presence or absence of radiation pneumonitis) experienced pneumonitis. AUC was 0.987 (0.961–1.000). The highest sensitivity was achieved with 0–4 points (100%), followed by 5 points (87.5%), highest specificity with 5–6 points (100%). The highest Youden-index was found for 5 points (87.5%). The rate of patient satisfaction with the symptom-based scoring system was 93.5%. A cut-off of 5 points was identified as optimal to differentiate between pneumonitis and no pneumonitis. Moreover, pneumonitis was significantly associated with an increase of ≥3 points from baseline (p < 0.0001). The scoring system provided excellent accuracy and high patient satisfaction. Important foundations for the development of a mobile application were laid.

AbstractBackgroundThere is a knowledge gap regarding lobar versus sublobar resection for atypical carcinoid (AC) of the lung. As such, the authors sought to understand and analyze the outcomes of sublobar resection versus lobectomy in this patient population.MethodsA retrospective analysis using the National Cancer Database was performed to compare overall survival (OS) between patients treated with lobectomy and patients treated with sublobar resection for AC of the lung between the years 2004 and 2016. Patient characteristics were compared with χ2 tests. The Kaplan–Meier method was used to estimate OS distributions, and the log‐rank test was used to compare distributions by treatment strategy. A multivariable Cox regression model was used to assess associations between the treatment strategy and OS. A propensity score matching method was also implemented to further eliminate treatment selection bias in the study sample.ResultsThe database identified 669 patients with T1–T4 and N0–N3 lung ACs that were surgically resected. Unadjusted Kaplan–Meier survival curves did not demonstrate an OS difference between lobectomy and sublobar resection (p = .094). After propensity score matching, curves demonstrated a numerical improvement in OS with lobectomy; however, it was not statistically significant (p = .5). In a subgroup analysis, lobectomy and node‐negative disease were associated with the best OS, whereas sublobar resection and node‐positive disease were associated with the worst OS (p < .0001). Nodal involvement was associated with worse survival, regardless of surgical treatment (p < .0001).ConclusionsIn patients with T1–T4 and N0–N3 ACs of the lung, lobectomy was not associated with an improvement in OS in comparison with sublobar resection.

Survival scores facilitate personalized cancer treatment. Due to demographic changes, very elderly patients are more prevalent than in the past. A score was developed in 94 patients aged ≥ 80 years undergoing whole-brain radiotherapy for brain metastases. Dose fractionation, treatment period, age, sex, performance score (ECOG-PS), tumor type, count of lesions, metastases outside the brain, and interval tumor diagnosis to radiotherapy were retrospectively evaluated. Independent predictors of survival were used for the score. Based on individual scoring points obtained from 3-month survival rates, prognostic groups were designed. Additionally, the score was compared to an existing tool developed in patients ≥ 65 years. ECOG-PS, count of lesions, and extra-cranial metastases were independent prognostic factors. Three groups were created (7, 10, and 13–16 points) with 3-month survival of 6%, 25%, and 67% (p < 0.001), respectively. Positive predictive values (PPVs) regarding death ≤ 3 and survival ≥ 3 months were 94% and 67% (new score) vs. 96% and 48% (existing tool), respectively. PPVs for survival ≥1 and ≥2 months were 88% and 79% vs. 63% and 58%, respectively. Both tools were accurate in predicting death ≤2, ≤3, and ≤6 months. The new score was more precise regarding death ≤1 month and survival (all time periods) and appeared preferable. However, it still needs to be validated.

Purpose In lung cancer, randomized trials assessing hyperfractionated or accelerated radiotherapy seem to yield conflicting results regarding the effects on overall (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS). The Meta-Analysis of Radiotherapy in Lung Cancer Collaborative Group decided to address the role of modified radiotherapy fractionation. Material and Methods We performed an individual patient data meta-analysis in patients with nonmetastatic lung cancer, which included trials comparing modified radiotherapy with conventional radiotherapy. Results In non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC; 10 trials, 2,000 patients), modified fractionation improved OS as compared with conventional schedules (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.88, 95% CI, 0.80 to 0.97; P = .009), resulting in an absolute benefit of 2.5% (8.3% to 10.8%) at 5 years. No evidence of heterogeneity between trials was found. There was no evidence of a benefit on PFS (HR = 0.94; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.03; P = .19). Modified radiotherapy reduced deaths resulting from lung cancer (HR = 0.89; 95% CI, 0.81 to 0.98; P = .02), and there was a nonsignificant reduction of non–lung cancer deaths (HR = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.15; P = .33). In small-cell lung cancer (SCLC; two trials, 685 patients), similar results were found: OS, HR = 0.87, 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.02, P = .08; PFS, HR = 0.88, 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.03, P = .11. In both NSCLC and SCLC, the use of modified radiotherapy increased the risk of acute esophageal toxicity (odds ratio [OR] = 2.44 in NSCLC and OR = 2.41 in SCLC; P < .001) but did not have an impact on the risk of other acute toxicities. Conclusion Patients with nonmetastatic NSCLC derived a significant OS benefit from accelerated or hyperfractionated radiotherapy; a similar but nonsignificant trend was observed for SCLC. As expected, there was increased acute esophageal toxicity.

Purpose There are scant data regarding the effects of prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) on neurocognitive function (NCF) and quality of life (QOL). Radiation Therapy Oncology Group trial 0214 showed no overall survival (OS) benefit for PCI in stage III non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) at 1 year. However, there was a significant decrease in brain metastases (BM). This analysis focuses on the impact of PCI on NCF and QOL. Patients and Methods Patients with stage III NSCLC who completed definitive therapy without progression were randomly assigned to PCI or observation. NCF was assessed with Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE), Activities of Daily Living Scale (ADLS), and Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT). QOL was assessed with the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) core tool (QOL Questionnaire-QLQC30) and brain module (QLQBN20). Results There were no statistically significant differences at 1 year between the two arms in any component of the EORTC-QLQC30 or QLQBN20 (P > .05), although a trend for greater decline in patient-reported cognitive functioning with PCI was noted. There were no significant differences in MMSE (P = .60) or ADLS (P = .88). However, for HVLT, there was greater decline in immediate recall (P = .03) and delayed recall (P = .008) in the PCI arm at 1 year. Conclusion PCI in stage III NSCLC significantly decreases the risk of BM without improving 1-year OS. There were no significant differences in global cognitive function (MMSE) or QOL after PCI, but there was a significant decline in memory (HVLT) at 1 year. This study provides prospective data regarding the relative risks and benefits of PCI in this setting and the need to use sensitive cognitive assessments.

PurposeThis study was conducted to determine if prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) improves survival in locally advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC).Patients and MethodsPatients with stage III NSCLC without disease progression after treatment with surgery and/or radiation therapy (RT) with or without chemotherapy were eligible. Participants were stratified by stage (IIIA v IIIB), histology (nonsquamous v squamous), and therapy (surgery v none) and were randomly assigned to PCI or observation. PCI was delivered to 30 Gy in 15 fractions. The primary end point of the study was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points were disease-free survival (DFS), neurocognitive function (NCF), and quality of life. Kaplan-Meier and log-rank analyses were used for OS and DFS. The incidence of brain metastasis (BM) was evaluated with the logistic regression model.ResultsOverall, 356 patients were accrued of the targeted 1,058. The study was closed early because of slow accrual; 340 of the 356 patients were eligible. The 1-year OS (P = .86; 75.6% v 76.9% for PCI v observation) and 1-year DFS (P = .11; 56.4% v 51.2% for PCI v observation) were not significantly different. The hazard ratio for observation versus PCI was 1.03 (95% CI, 0.77 to 1.36). The 1-year rates of BM were significantly different (P = .004; 7.7% v 18.0% for PCI v observation). Patients in the observation arm were 2.52 times more likely to develop BM than those in the PCI arm (unadjusted odds ratio, 2.52; 95% CI, 1.32 to 4.80).ConclusionIn patients with stage III disease without progression of disease after therapy, PCI decreased the rate of BM but did not improve OS or DFS.

Purpose The appropriate treatment for MSCC is controversial. A small randomized trial showed that decompressive surgery followed by radiotherapy was superior to radiotherapy alone. That study was limited to highly selected patients. Additional studies comparing surgery plus radiotherapy to radiotherapy could better clarify the role of surgery. Methods Data from 108 patients receiving surgery plus radiotherapy were matched to 216 patients (1:2) receiving radiotherapy alone. Groups were matched for 11 potential prognostic factors and compared for post-treatment motor function, ambulatory status, regaining ambulatory status, local control, and survival. Subgroup analyses were performed for patients receiving adequate surgery (direct decompressive surgery plus stabilization of involved vertebrae), patients receiving laminectomy, patients with solid tumors, patients with solid tumors receiving adequate surgery, and patients with solid tumors receiving laminectomy. Results Improvement of motor function occurred in 27% of patients after surgery plus radiotherapy and 26% after radiotherapy alone (P = .92). Post-treatment ambulatory rates were 69% after surgery plus radiotherapy and 68% after radiotherapy alone (P = .99). Of the nonambulatory patients, 30% and 26%, respectively, (P = .86) regained ambulatory status after treatment. One-year local control rates were 90% after surgery plus radiotherapy and 91% after radiotherapy alone (P = .48). One-year overall survival rates were 47% and 40%, respectively (P = .50). The subgroup analyses did not show significant differences between both groups. Surgery-related complications occurred in 11% of patients. Conclusion In this study, the outcomes of the end points evaluated after radiotherapy alone appeared similar to those of surgery plus radiotherapy. A new randomized trial comparing both treatments is justified.